Your message dated Fri, 15 Feb 2013 15:39:19 +0100
with message-id <20130215143918.ga29...@gaara.hadrons.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#700609: dpkg: /var/lib/dpkg/arch is a configuration
file, and should be in /etc/dpkg
has caused the Debian Bug report #700609,
regarding dpkg: /var/lib/dpkg/arch is a configuration file, and should be in
/etc/dpkg
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
700609: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=700609
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: dpkg
Version: 1.16.9
Justification: Policy 10.7.2
Severity: serious
Dear Maintainer,
To me, it seems that the file 'arch', which is currently in /var/lib/dpkg,
is a configuration file, which means it should be in /etc/dpkg.
Kind reagards,
Rogier.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 7.0
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 3.2.0-4-amd64 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/dash
Versions of packages dpkg depends on:
ii libbz2-1.0 1.0.6-4
ii libc6 2.13-37
ii liblzma5 5.1.1alpha+20120614-2
ii libselinux1 2.1.9-5
ii tar 1.26+dfsg-0.1
ii zlib1g 1:1.2.7.dfsg-13
dpkg recommends no packages.
Versions of packages dpkg suggests:
ii apt 0.9.7.7
-- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi!
On Fri, 2013-02-15 at 09:30:43 +0100, Rogier wrote:
> Package: dpkg
> Version: 1.16.9
> Justification: Policy 10.7.2
> Severity: serious
> To me, it seems that the file 'arch', which is currently in /var/lib/dpkg,
> is a configuration file, which means it should be in /etc/dpkg.
It is not, it's part of the dpkg database, and needs to be consistent
with what's been installed. The same argument could well be applied
to the whole dpkg db. Thus I'm closing this now.
(But even if the bug report was valid, serious is a way overinflated
severity.)
Thanks,
Guillem
--- End Message ---
